Fanny Riols

Tara Bogavelli, Gabrielle Gauthier Melançon, Katrina Stankiewicz et al.

Voice agents, artificial intelligence systems that conduct spoken conversations to complete tasks, are increasingly deployed across enterprise applications. However, no existing benchmark jointly addresses two core evaluation challenges: generating realistic simulated conversations, and measuring quality across the full scope of voice-specific failure modes. We present EVA-Bench, an end-to-end evaluation framework that addresses both. On the simulation side, EVA-Bench orchestrates bot-to-bot audio conversations over dynamic multi-turn dialogues, with automatic simulation validation that detects user simulator error and appropriately regenerates conversations before scoring. On the measurement side, EVA-Bench introduces two composite metrics: EVA-A (Accuracy), capturing task completion, faithfulness, and audio-level speech fidelity; and EVA-X (Experience), capturing conversation progression, spoken conciseness, and turn-taking timing. Both metrics apply to different agent architectures, enabling direct cross-architecture comparison. EVA-Bench includes 213 scenarios across three enterprise domains, a controlled perturbation suite for accent and noise robustness, and pass@1, pass@k, pass^k measurements that distinguish peak from reliable capability. Across 12 systems spanning all three architectures, we find: (1) no system simultaneously exceeds 0.5 on both EVA-A pass@1 and EVA-X pass@1; (2) peak and reliable performance diverge substantially (median pass@k - pass^k gap of 0.44 on EVA-A); and (3) accent and noise perturbations expose substantial robustness gaps, with effects varying across architectures, systems, and metrics (mean up to 0.314). We release the full framework, evaluation suite, and benchmark data under an open-source license.

Tara Bogavelli, Oluwanifemi Bamgbose, Gabrielle Gauthier Melançon et al.

Enterprise LLM applications require consistently high quality and reliable performance across diverse scenarios, demanding robustness to minor variations. Existing research shows that even small prompt changes can lead to substantial differences in output, but has mainly focused on a narrow set of perturbations with small academic datasets, limiting their relevance to real-world applications. To address this, we present a comprehensive benchmark suite that evaluates robustness across multiple perturbation types, including general text edits (e.g., punctuation, whitespace), formatting changes (e.g., JSON, YAML), multilingual and cross-lingual inputs, and positional variations in instructions. Evaluating 11 models ranging from 4B to 120B+ parameters, we find that minor perturbations reduce performance by up to 40 percentage points on key enterprise metrics. Critically, we demonstrate that the relationship between model size and robustness is more nuanced than conventional assumptions suggest: an 8B parameter model (Ministral 3 8B) outperforms most larger models, while another 8B model (Llama 3.1 8B) performs worst overall.